ISO 14001:2004 - 4.3.2 Legal & Other Requirements - Level of detail expected

[kalehner]

ISO 14001:2004 requires organizations to determine how environmental regulations and other requirements apply to its environmental aspects. I am interested in thoughts on the level of detail the standard expects the aspect-to-requirement linkage to be. Is it ok just to say “used oil is regulated aspect” or does the standard expect greater detail (40 CFR Part 279)? Does the linkage need to actually describe the requirement such as 40 CFR Part 279.22 (c) Labels (1) Containers and aboveground tanks used to store oil at generators facilities must be labeled or marked clearly with the words “Used Oil”.

How much detail does the standard expect? What about state regulations? Here in WI we have NR 590 Subchapter II Standards for Used Oil Generators that also specifies labeling requirements. Is aspect linkage needed to those requirements also?

There are probably thousands of state federal and local environmental regulations and other requirements that apply to a large complex manufacturing facility. Does an organizations need to list them all and in what format? If so where is the value in doing so? Why not just reference the entire code?

 

[Randy]

Hey Kevin, how've you been?

I've already done a 14K;2004 registration audit for a fairly complex organization and what they did was just make a table listing aspects and the associated regulation (for those that have them of course). Real simple and sweat.

Quite honestly it can be as simple or as complicated as the organization wants. Ultimately the goal is to show linkage...the follow through is done in 4.5.2.1

 

[kalehner]

Hi Randy:

Been good. A little more work over the last few months would have helped, but things are starting to pick up. How about you?

I have also been doing 14001:2004 audits but have not been happy with the guidance from registrars on this and am too cheap to buy 14004:2004 to see if there is anything different in there than was in the DIS.

My real issue is with the “how these requirements apply” part of 4.3.2 (b). To me, a simple list only shows the auditee understands “what” regulations apply not “how” they apply. To show “how” you almost need to recite the rule and describe how it applies to each aspect. If 14004:2004 has expanded its discussion on this from that in the DIS I will get it. The annex to 14001:2004 is almost useless here. It sounds like they are saying that if you determine that a regulation applies the standard assumes that you know how it applies. I am not sure I buy that because somebody might know that a MACT standard applies to a process without knowing much about how it applies.

 

[Dr. L. Ramakrishnan]

Hi ! I have just given a training programme on ISO-14001 (2004). The attached slide was a part of the programme. Please see if that satisfies your question. With best regards, Ramakrishnan

 

[kalehner]

Thanks Dr. L. Ramakrishnan for the opinion but I am not convinced that the standard only requires linkage to the enabling legislation (The Act). In the USA congress passes legislation (Clean Air Act) which contains some limited specific requirements (deadlines etc.). Most of the requirements derived from the enabling legislation (Act) are in the form of rules (Code of Federal Regulations) that congress requires USEPA to create (an example are MACT standards). I believe that to simply refer (link) to the Act as the regulatory requirement does not show that the organizations understands “how” the regulation applies.

Another way to look at it is in the light of 4.5.2.1 and 4.5.2.2. To be able to effectively perform a compliance evaluation you must have identified the audit criteria (requirements or standard). To identify the Clean Air Act as the applicable audit criteria when evaluating compliance with federal air pollution requirements would probably exclude 99.9% of the federal requirements/rules (40 CFR) from consideration. Before you can do a good job of compliance evaluation in 4.5.2 you need to understand how the regulations apply. Only then can a compliance auditor evaluate objective evidence provided against the audit criteria (rules) to determine if the requirement has been met.

I believe that is why the standard was changed to require in 4.3.2 that an organization determine “how” regulations apply to its aspects. Only after they have done the identification of “how” the regulations apply can they determine if they are meeting those requirements. The question I continue to struggle with is how much detail on the actual requirements is enough for 4.3.2 and to enable performance of 4.5.2?

 

[Spanner]

The way I have done it is by creating two registers one for legislation and one for aspects. The legislation register splits legislation into categories eg Emissions to air, solid waste etc. Then each relevant law or other requirement is given a reference number eg SW1 for the first solid waste regulation. The relevant regulation etc and how it applies to us is summarised in the next column. Then we define how we need to check compliance. Then as we carry out compliance checks we record the results on the form, date they were carried out and who verified it.

Columns:

Ref; Legislation; How the Legislation applies to us; Compliance Check Method; Result of compliance check; Date of Last Compliance Check;Verified by.

The aspects register is split into similar categories, emissions to air, solid waste etc. Those aspects that relate to legislation requirements then reference the number from the legislation register eg SW1.

I have put in legislation and regulations that might apply to us and then explained in the ‘how it applies to us’ column that it doesn’t and why it doesn’t.

This keeps your legislation and aspects linked. The aspects register shows how you are controlling the legislation requirements and the legislation register shows you have checked compliance and how you did it.

 

[jmurph01]

we are doing this similar to what Spanner has mentioned in the previous post with regards to a list of legal requirements and a registry of aspects. while we have not been audited to 2004 yet, i have been in contact with my auditor and this is what he had suggested was required to meet the standard. I like how you are documenting compliance checks and may have to implement something similar. thanks for the suggestions!!!

 

[Sirsteven]

Help

I am setting up ISO14000 in my company. How do I find the rules and regulatory requirements for my area. Is there a website I can check from time to time for update? I am in Torrance CA.
Thanks,
Steve

 

[Randy]

DUH!!!

How about through the California EPA? (Board of Toxic Substance Control)

Or better yet, get someone with expertise in california environmental compliance

 

[kalehner]

Consider having someone familiar with California, Los Angeles and Southern California Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) environmental regulations in the room when you are identifying environmental aspects and determining significance. Make one of the criteria you use to determine significant “is it regulated?”.

The person in the room who is competent with environmental regulations should be able to tell you if an aspect is regulated and generally what regulations apply and how they apply. Some additional research may be needed to clearly define what regulations apply and how they apply.

Environmental regulations are complex. Good choices for environmental professionals to have in the room during aspect identification are experienced environmental lawyers, and some environmental engineers. Environmental professionals certified by RABQSA as Lead Auditors (EMS-LA) have demonstrated to RABQSA environmental regulatory knowledge and compliance evaluation competence. Look for that credential as objective evidence of professional qualification to identify applicable environmental regulations and how they apply to your aspects.

(Sorry for the consultant add guys but it sounds like this fellow needs some help).